Does Your Loved One Need Care? Tune In at 7 p.m. ET for AARP's 'Family Caregiving Online Series.' Register Now

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: Free Speech

205 Views
Message 121 of 270

Richva wrote:

The thing about the right to free speach is that it is not the right to exercise it anywhere you wish.  If the students at a university do not wish to hear a certain speaker, that speaker has every right to walk to the nearest public space and continue the dialog.  

 

When Milo Yiannopoulos came out for man/boy sex, the conservatives un-invited him from THEIR convention but scream if he does not get invited to Berkely. Trump states flag burners should lose their citizenship. He claimed a speaker had no right to say Trump had not read the Constitution.  He has blocked anyone from his Twitter feed who disagree with him. He has repeatedly called for shutting down parts of the internet. He wants to stiffen libel laws to protect his thin hide. 

 

So, as usual, the conservatives want it both ways. No restrictions on when and where for the people with whom they agree but screams of "We need to be protected from this" for anyone who does not. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-brief-history-of-donald-trumps-mixed-messages-on-freedom-o...


If the students do not want to hear his words - no one is requiring their attendance.

 

Yes, we Conservatives do want it both ways - the right for anyone to say anything they want and the right for anyone to not attend such speeches that they do not want to hear.

Report Inappropriate Content
Treasured Social Butterfly

Re: Free Speech

216 Views
Message 122 of 270

Fishslayer777 wrote:
This last post is classic fertile ground for authoritarianism. If you don't see that.... your blind.


ill put it this way..i dont see it. so you say im blind. right? if you want me to see it, you are going to have to point out FIRST what post, then explain. otherwise, you are just protesting someone free speech here, and adding an insult. I mean its par for the course with all of us. yet.....

 

So it begins.
Report Inappropriate Content
Treasured Social Butterfly

Re: Free Speech

211 Views
Message 123 of 270

rk9152 wrote:

ChasKy53 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

 



It seems impossible to get an answer from MIseker, so I'll ask the writers of the above - Cassandra Santiago and Tina Burnside, what are your thoughts on "What do we want, dead cop..."? is that hates speech so not covered by free speech? And how about those Klan hoods vs masks and bandannas?


Why do you go to such great lengths and use never ending examples in trying to defend a white supremacist hate group such as the KKK?


There is no way a rational thinker could see any defense of anyone in the above.


Rational thinkers follow what logic you are trying to interject.  Klan hoods vs bandanas? yup..the Klan promotes hate, the bandanas go after the hate group. see? they are at oppostie ends of the spectrum, but, you continue to compare the two, trying to equate them. you are, in most of your posts, telling people they must believe apples and oranges are the same. 

 

What do we want Dead Cops is pretty radical, but its not revolutionary, it reactionary. whay do you suppose people are have that kind of a reaction? could it be they are tired of cops victimizing them? I know to you thats another apples to apples but its not. its been going on since before the constitution allowed for southern militias chasing slaves. 

So it begins.
Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: Free Speech

214 Views
Message 124 of 270
@Mlseker

I hope that just a defensive answer, because it's seems fairly obvious that I'm not against free speech, but I am wary of one group accusing another of lying so much people are killing themselves. That is the language and pattern of authoritarianism to demonise the Jews. It's tantamount to hate speech that created the holocaust.


Hate is not a Christian virtue, neither is liberal sanctimony
Report Inappropriate Content
Treasured Social Butterfly

Re: Free Speech

221 Views
Message 125 of 270

The thing about the right to free speach is that it is not the right to exercise it anywhere you wish.  If the students at a university do not wish to hear a certain speaker, that speaker has every right to walk to the nearest public space and continue the dialog.  

 

When Milo Yiannopoulos came out for man/boy sex, the conservatives un-invited him from THEIR convention but scream if he does not get invited to Berkely. Trump states flag burners should lose their citizenship. He claimed a speaker had no right to say Trump had not read the Constitution.  He has blocked anyone from his Twitter feed who disagree with him. He has repeatedly called for shutting down parts of the internet. He wants to stiffen libel laws to protect his thin hide. 

 

So, as usual, the conservatives want it both ways. No restrictions on when and where for the people with whom they agree but screams of "We need to be protected from this" for anyone who does not. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-brief-history-of-donald-trumps-mixed-messages-on-freedom-o...

Report Inappropriate Content
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: Free Speech

217 Views
Message 126 of 270

MIseker wrote:

Fishslayer777 wrote:
This last post is classic fertile ground for authoritarianism. If you don't see that.... your blind.


does that mean you are against free speech?


Is that really your interpretation of the post - or are you just playing games?

Report Inappropriate Content
Treasured Social Butterfly

Re: Free Speech

208 Views
Message 127 of 270

Fishslayer777 wrote:
This last post is classic fertile ground for authoritarianism. If you don't see that.... your blind.


does that mean you are against free speech?

So it begins.
Report Inappropriate Content
Treasured Social Butterfly

Re: Free Speech

206 Views
Message 128 of 270

rk9152 wrote:

Olderscout66 wrote:

Our Constitution was written when an excellent orator could project his voice no more than 200 yards, and the only record of what was said was the written word, copied down by a listener. There were charismatic speakers, but no Universities with entire departments devoted to understanding and perfecting the art of persuasion and entire agencies of Government devoted to delivering specific messages to an audience of billions without the listener realizing who was doing the talking.

 

In short, today "Free Speech" is a very slippery concept and those who demand it be followed per the rules of the 18th Century are those who use it to deceive and enrage rather than to enlighten and support.

 

We now have tragic proof "free speech" can be used to rig an election so the biggest liar wins. The protests against fascists and KKK speaking in public are the only real defense against those glib purveyors of hate and division from prevailing in the polls so the Nation ceases to function as a Democracy.

 

The Public has a right to NOT be lied to that supersedes the RWers Right to Lie. You can go to jail for driving a person to suicide with glib talk, and that same standard needs to be applied to those who would drive us to a National Suicide where Democracy is the victim.

 

 


An interesting idea - pols always told the truth until.....when was it, around the time of the Reagan taxscam?

 

Back in the day there were things called "muckrakers" who used journalism to sell their ideas. Was that wrong?

 

Nixon got tripped up by a media that did not exist in the colonial days. Was that wrong?

 

JFK beat Nixon due to the use of TV, not available in the colonial days. Was that wrong?

 

Ideas and freedom are not technology based - they stand alone.

 

And then the idea of RWers Right to Lie - does the left have exclusive Right to Lie?


Everyone who breathes has told lies - and will unquestionably tell more before they cease breathing - it is a basic human characteristic.

 

An elevated propensity for telling lies currently exists in a majority of members of the Grand Old Pedophile (republican) party...

 

 

Have pity for Melania - she wakes up with a jerk every morning
Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: Free Speech

199 Views
Message 129 of 270

Olderscout66 wrote:

Our Constitution was written when an excellent orator could project his voice no more than 200 yards, and the only record of what was said was the written word, copied down by a listener. There were charismatic speakers, but no Universities with entire departments devoted to understanding and perfecting the art of persuasion and entire agencies of Government devoted to delivering specific messages to an audience of billions without the listener realizing who was doing the talking.

 

In short, today "Free Speech" is a very slippery concept and those who demand it be followed per the rules of the 18th Century are those who use it to deceive and enrage rather than to enlighten and support.

 

We now have tragic proof "free speech" can be used to rig an election so the biggest liar wins. The protests against fascists and KKK speaking in public are the only real defense against those glib purveyors of hate and division from prevailing in the polls so the Nation ceases to function as a Democracy.

 

The Public has a right to NOT be lied to that supersedes the RWers Right to Lie. You can go to jail for driving a person to suicide with glib talk, and that same standard needs to be applied to those who would drive us to a National Suicide where Democracy is the victim.

 

 


An interesting idea - pols always told the truth until.....when was it, around the time of the Reagan taxscam?

 

Back in the day there were things called "muckrakers" who used journalism to sell their ideas. Was that wrong?

 

Nixon got tripped up by a media that did not exist in the colonial days. Was that wrong?

 

JFK beat Nixon due to the use of TV, not available in the colonial days. Was that wrong?

 

Ideas and freedom are not technology based - they stand alone.

 

And then the idea of RWers Right to Lie - does the left have exclusive Right to Lie?

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: Free Speech

205 Views
Message 130 of 270
This last post is classic fertile ground for authoritarianism. If you don't see that.... your blind.


Hate is not a Christian virtue, neither is liberal sanctimony
Report Inappropriate Content